Is there a good reason for Synology to change the support of “Unverified Drives” in DSM?

Synology has long been regarded as one of the most user-friendly and reliable NAS brands in the market, balancing intuitive software with a wide hardware range that appeals to both home and business users. However, in recent years the company has taken an increasingly controversial path by enforcing strict compatibility requirements for hard drives and SSDs. Beginning with DSM 7 and escalating into the 2025 generation of devices, Synology now only certifies and supports its own branded storage media, effectively locking out many widely used alternatives from Seagate, Western Digital, and Toshiba. While Synology positions this move as a way to ensure system stability and consistency, the decision has sparked significant backlash among users who feel restricted in their options and burdened by higher costs. As competitors expand their ecosystems with more openness and flexibility, this proprietary approach risks damaging Synology’s reputation, raising questions about whether the company has prioritized profit margins over user choice.

What is the MAIN PROBLEM(s) with this decision by Synology?

The most immediate problem with Synology’s hard drive policy is the loss of flexibility that once made their systems so appealing. For years, customers could select from a wide range of industry-standard drives from Seagate, Western Digital, or Toshiba, tailoring storage to their budget, performance requirements, or regional availability. This freedom not only allowed users to balance cost and capacity, but also gave small businesses and home enthusiasts the ability to reuse existing drives, upgrade incrementally, or take advantage of promotions from different vendors. By restricting DSM compatibility to Synology-labelled drives, that flexibility is gone. For many users outside major markets, Synology’s drives are harder to source, priced higher than the competition, or limited in available capacities. What once felt like an open platform now increasingly resembles a closed ecosystem, where users must accept the vendor’s terms even if it means compromising on affordability or performance.

Another dimension of the problem lies in how Synology has communicated these changes, which many see as evasive or disingenuous. Officially, the company justifies the restriction as a move toward greater reliability and predictable system performance. The argument is that by narrowing the range of drives tested and supported, Synology can optimize DSM to work seamlessly with drives that have firmware tailored for its environment. In practice, though, the same underlying hardware often originates from Seagate or Toshiba, with only minor firmware adjustments and new branding. This creates a perception that Synology is overstating the technical benefits while quietly using the policy to secure higher margins. For long-time users, the contrast is stark: older models happily ran third-party drives with few issues, which makes the sudden insistence on “certification” seem less like an engineering requirement and more like a business maneuver. The result has been a significant erosion of trust between the company and its community.

The wider impact of this strategy has also been felt across the storage industry. Resellers have reported declining sales of Synology’s Plus series devices as customers explore alternatives such as QNAP, TrueNAS, or newer entrants like UGREEN and UniFi. For Synology, this shift is particularly damaging because its reputation has historically rested on attracting less technical buyers who value simplicity and reliability over DIY solutions. Now, even these entry-level and mid-range users are questioning whether they should commit to an ecosystem that limits their choice of drives and increases their costs. At the same time, hard drive manufacturers like Seagate and Western Digital are also affected, as Synology’s decision reduces the number of channels through which their products reach end customers. The ripple effect is therefore twofold: Synology risks alienating its base of loyal customers, while storage vendors lose a once-reliable partner, creating tension that could ultimately push more buyers toward competing NAS brands.

How Can Synology Solve This (if they want to)?

One path forward for Synology would be to adopt a hybrid compatibility model, where its own branded drives remain the recommended or default choice but third-party alternatives are still officially supported. This compromise has been proven by other vendors such as UniFi and QNAP, who sell their own labelled drives while maintaining compatibility lists for major manufacturers like Seagate, Western Digital, and Toshiba. By following this model, Synology could continue promoting the reliability benefits of its branded hardware without alienating customers who prefer flexibility. In practice, this would preserve a sense of choice for users while ensuring Synology can still highlight its “optimized” solutions as the safer, supported route.

 

 

Finally, Synology could address the availability and pricing concerns around its own branded drives. In many regions, these drives are either difficult to source or significantly more expensive than equivalent Seagate or Western Digital models. Improving distribution channels, ensuring consistent stock, and narrowing the price gap would make the transition more palatable to users who are willing to adopt Synology’s ecosystem but feel penalized by limited access. By focusing on accessibility and fairness rather than exclusivity, Synology could rebuild goodwill while still driving revenue from its hardware strategy. Taken together, these steps would not fully reverse the controversy but would demonstrate responsiveness and provide a clearer path to balancing stability, customer choice, and profitability.

Is there a way to FORCE a Synology NAS to accept unverified Hard Drives and SSDs in DSM?

For users unwilling to accept Synology’s restrictive stance on storage media, the community has developed reliable workarounds that re-enable full functionality for third-party hard drives and SSDs. The most widely adopted method involves injecting a script into the NAS system that bypasses DSM’s compatibility database, allowing otherwise unsupported drives to be used for installation, storage pools, caching, and expansion. Synology’s 2025 Plus-series models, such as the DS925+, block DSM installation if only unverified drives are present and issue constant warnings in Storage Manager. To overcome this, users first employ a Telnet-based flag during initial setup that tricks DSM into accepting the installation, followed by a more permanent fix applied through SSH. At the heart of this solution is Dave Russell’s (007revad) GitHub project Synology_HDD_db, which modifies DSM’s internal drive compatibility files. Once downloaded and executed via SSH, the script detects the NAS model, DSM version, and connected drives, then patches the system to treat them as officially supported.

The process is reversible, non-destructive, and works across multiple DSM versions, including DSM 7.2 and later. Additional features allow removal of persistent warning banners, full use of NVMe drives as storage volumes, and optional disabling of intrusive monitoring services like WDDA. To ensure ongoing stability, users can also configure a scheduled task in DSM’s Task Scheduler that re-applies the script at every boot, guaranteeing compatibility survives updates, reboots, or new drive insertions. While the script is robust and actively maintained, there are clear disclaimers: using it involves modifying system files, may void official Synology support, and should only be attempted by users confident with SSH and terminal commands who have reliable data backups. Nonetheless, for advanced users, system integrators, and enthusiasts, this community-driven solution has become the de facto method of restoring the freedom to use affordable and widely available third-party drives in modern Synology NAS systems.

Example of a 30TB Seagate HDD visible and functioning inside a Synology DS925+

Note – You can follow my guide on how to use this script modification (as well as outlining the pros and cons) HERE on the blog, or watch the video below:

The Future of Synology in the eyes of new and old buyers?

Synology’s decision to enforce exclusive support for its own branded hard drives and SSDs marks one of the most controversial shifts in the company’s history, transforming how both long-time customers and potential buyers view the brand. For over a decade, Synology’s appeal rested on a combination of intuitive software, solid hardware, and flexibility in allowing users to choose their own storage media from trusted vendors like Seagate, Toshiba, and Western Digital. By removing that choice in the 2025 generation, Synology has fundamentally altered the value proposition of its systems, making them appear less like open storage platforms and more like tightly controlled appliances. While the company justifies the policy by citing stability, predictability, and reduced support overhead, many users interpret it as a profit-driven attempt to push proprietary drives into the market, especially since these are often rebranded versions of third-party disks with modified firmware and higher price tags.

The backlash has been considerable, with resellers and community forums reporting falling interest in Synology’s Plus-series devices, particularly among home and small business users who previously embraced them for affordability and ease of expansion. Competing NAS providers such as QNAP, TrueNAS, UGREEN, and UniFi have been quick to capitalize on the discontent, positioning themselves as more open alternatives that maintain compatibility with industry-standard drives. At the same time, the growth of unofficial solutions like Dave Russell’s compatibility script demonstrates how determined users are to regain control over their hardware, even at the risk of voiding warranty or stepping outside official support. This dynamic reflects a widening gap between Synology’s official direction and the needs of its customer base, many of whom would prefer to accept a disclaimer about using unverified drives rather than being forced into a closed ecosystem.

Ultimately, Synology now stands at a crossroads that will define its reputation in the storage industry for years to come. If it continues to double down on a closed, proprietary model, the company may secure short-term revenue through drive sales but risks long-term damage to its image and market share. On the other hand, reintroducing a more flexible, transparent approach—such as allowing user consent for unsupported drives or improving global pricing and availability of its own disks—could restore trust and preserve its standing as the NAS brand of choice for both novices and professionals. The availability of community workarounds ensures that frustrated users are not entirely locked out of their systems, but the very existence of these tools highlights how far Synology has drifted from its once customer-first ethos. The next few years will be crucial, as the company either adjusts course and strikes a balance between profitability and user freedom, or risks ceding ground to rivals who are eager to embrace the openness Synology has chosen to leave behind.

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER
[contact-form-7]
Join Inner Circle

This description contains links to Amazon. These links will take you to some of the products mentioned in today's content. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Visit the NASCompares Deal Finder to find the best place to buy this device in your region, based on Service, Support and Reputation - Just Search for your NAS Drive in the Box Below

Need Advice on Data Storage from an Expert?

Finally, for free advice about your setup, just leave a message in the comments below here at NASCompares.com and we will get back to you. Need Help? Where possible (and where appropriate) please provide as much information about your requirements, as then I can arrange the best answer and solution to your needs. Do not worry about your e-mail address being required, it will NOT be used in a mailing list and will NOT be used in any way other than to respond to your enquiry. [contact-form-7] TRY CHAT Terms and Conditions   Alternatively, why not ask me on the ASK NASCompares forum, by clicking the button below. This is a community hub that serves as a place that I can answer your question, chew the fat, share new release information and even get corrections posted. I will always get around to answering ALL queries, but as a one-man operation, I cannot promise speed! So by sharing your query in the ASK NASCompares section below, you can get a better range of solutions and suggestions, alongside my own.

WE LOVE COFFEE

 

Use Whatever Hard Drives or SSDs on Your Synology NAS (2025 Guide)

Note – there is a YouTube tutorial version of this guide HERE on the NASCompares YouTube Channel

Synology’s 2025 generation of NAS systems, such as the DS925+ and other Plus series models, introduced a more restrictive approach to drive compatibility. Unlike previous generations, these devices enforce a compatibility check that blocks or limits functionality when non-Synology hard drives or SSDs are used. As a result, users are unable to install DSM, create storage pools, or configure caching volumes using unverified drives. Even drives that work in earlier Synology models are now flagged as unsupported, resulting in persistent alerts or outright refusal to function. This guide provides a complete walkthrough for users who want to bypass those restrictions and enable full usage of third-party SATA and NVMe drives, including for pools, volumes, hot spares, and cache. It includes step-by-step instructions on how to install DSM with only unverified drives, how to remove system warnings, and how to automate the process for future updates or drive additions. The solutions here rely on trusted scripts developed by the Synology community and require minimal system modification, allowing users to regain control over their own hardware.

Special Thanks to Dave Russell

The ability to bypass Synology’s restrictive drive compatibility checks would not be possible without the extensive work of Dave Russell, widely known in the Synology community as 007revad. His GitHub project, Synology_HDD_db, is the basis for all the procedures outlined in this guide. The script he developed modifies DSM’s internal compatibility database, enabling full functionality for otherwise unsupported HDDs, SSDs, and NVMe drives. Dave has not only written and maintained this complex script, but also ensured that it works across different NAS models and DSM versions, including DSM 7.2 and newer. He continues to improve the tool in response to Synology firmware changes, regularly providing updates and extended options such as M.2 volume support and WDDA disablement. Users are strongly encouraged to consult the official GitHub repository, follow the provided documentation, and, where possible, support his ongoing work HERE, which remains freely available to the broader NAS community.

MASSIVE Disclaimer

Modifying your Synology NAS to allow the use of unverified drives is not officially supported by Synology. By applying the changes described in this guide, you will be altering system files and bypassing built-in compatibility checks within DSM. While these changes are reversible and have been widely tested, doing so may void your Synology warranty or affect your ability to receive technical support from the manufacturer, even in cases unrelated to storage. Additionally, although the script-based method described here is non-destructive and has proven safe for many users, there is always a minimal risk of issues following DSM updates or hardware changes. You should not proceed unless you have full backups of your data and are comfortable with SSH and terminal operations. This guide is intended for advanced users, system integrators, or home NAS enthusiasts who understand the risks and accept responsibility for operating outside of official Synology support channels.

---

How to Set Up a Synology NAS with No Drives Installed to Allow DSM Installation

Synology’s 2025 and later Plus-series NAS systems will not allow DSM installation if only unverified drives are present. However, it is possible to bypass this limitation and install DSM without using any Synology-branded or officially supported drives. The method involves enabling Telnet access and overriding the drive compatibility check during the DSM installation process.

Step-by-Step Instructions:

• Physically set up your NAS

  • Connect the NAS to your local network using Ethernet.

  • Ensure the device is powered on, even if no drives are installed or only unverified drives are present.

• Attempt initial DSM setup

  • Use Synology Assistant or go to http://find.synology.com to locate your NAS.

  • Proceed through the DSM installation wizard. You will likely encounter an error indicating that the inserted drive(s) are unsupported.

• Enable Telnet access

  • In a browser, navigate to:
    http://<NAS-IP>:5000/webman/start_telnet.cgi
    Replace <NAS-IP> with the actual IP address of your NAS.

• Connect via Telnet

  • Open a Telnet client like PuTTY.

  • Enter your NAS IP address and connect via Telnet.

  • When prompted, use:

    • Username: root

    • Password: 101-0101 (default for this Telnet interface)

• Bypass installation check

  • Enter the following command into the Telnet window:

    while true; do touch /tmp/installable_check_pass; sleep 1; done


  • This creates a temporary flag that bypasses the system’s compatibility verification loop.

• Return to the DSM install page

  • Refresh the browser window where you began the DSM setup.

  • DSM will now allow installation to proceed, even on unverified drives.

• Finish DSM setup

  • Complete the DSM installation.

  • Create your admin user account when prompted.

  • You can now access the full DSM interface.

Once DSM is installed, you can proceed to apply the permanent drive compatibility fixes, create storage pools, and remove warning banners—all covered in the next section.

---

 

How to Allow Unverified HDDs or SSDs to Be Used for Storage Pools, Volumes, and Caching (and Remove Warnings)

Once DSM is installed, unverified drives will still be blocked from creating storage pools, volumes, or caches. Even if the system boots, Storage Manager will display warnings or greyed-out options. To unlock full functionality, you must apply a community-developed script that updates DSM’s internal drive compatibility database. This section outlines how to download, apply, and validate that change.

Step-by-Step Instructions:

• Enable SSH on your NAS
  • In DSM, go to Control Panel > Terminal & SNMP > Terminal.
  • Enable SSH service and click Apply.

• Prepare SSH access
  • Use PuTTY (or your preferred SSH client) to connect to your NAS.
  • Log in using your DSM administrator username and password (not root at this stage).
• Create working directory
  • Once connected, elevate to root:

    sudo -i
    

  • Create the required folder:

    mkdir -m775 /opt
    cd /opt
    

• Download the required scripts
  • Run the following commands to download the latest versions directly from Dave Russell’s GitHub:

    curl -O "https://raw.githubusercontent.com/007revad/Synology_HDD_db/refs/heads/main/syno_hdd_db.sh"
    curl -O "https://raw.githubusercontent.com/007revad/Synology_HDD_db/refs/heads/main/syno_hdd_vendor_ids.txt"
    chmod 750 /opt/syno_hdd_db.sh
    

• Run the script
  • Execute the script to patch the drive database:

    /opt/syno_hdd_db.sh
    

  • The script will detect your NAS model, DSM version, and connected drives. It will then add those drives to the compatibility database and back up the original files.

• Check Storage Manager
  • Return to DSM’s Storage Manager.
  • If changes are not immediately visible, reboot your NAS.
  • You should now be able to create storage pools, volumes, and SSD caches with unverified drives, without warning messages.
• Optional: Disable compatibility warnings completely
  • To stop future drive alerts from DSM, you may also want to run:

    /usr/syno/bin/synosetkeyvalue /etc.defaults/synoinfo.conf support_disk_compatibility no
    

At this point, all third-party drives currently installed in the system will be fully usable and recognized as supported. The next section explains how to add additional unverified drives later and have them automatically accepted.

---

 

What to Do When Adding New HDDs or SSDs Later for Expansion, Replacement, or Hot Spares

After your initial setup and database modification, any newly added unverified drives will still appear as unsupported in DSM until they are explicitly added to the modified compatibility database. This section outlines how to safely introduce new drives for RAID expansion, hot spare assignment, or disk replacement without encountering blockages or warning messages.

Step-by-Step Instructions:

• Physically install the new drive(s)
  • Power down your NAS if required (for systems that don’t support hot-swapping).
  • Insert the new unverified HDDs or SSDs into available bays.
  • Power the NAS back on and log in to DSM.
• Check Storage Manager
  • Go to Storage Manager > HDD/SSD.
  • Newly added drives will appear but will be marked as “Not supported” or “Unverified.”
  • They will not be usable for volume expansion or as hot spares until added to the compatibility list.
• Reconnect via SSH
  • Use PuTTY or your SSH client to log into DSM with your admin credentials.
  • Elevate to root access:

    sudo -i
    

• Navigate to the working directory
  • Assuming you previously created /opt and stored the script there:

    cd /opt
    

• Run the update script again
  • This re-applies the database patch and includes newly inserted drives:

    ./syno_hdd_db.sh

1. Verify drive status
   • Go back to Storage Manager.
   • Refresh the page or reboot the NAS if needed.
   • The newly added drives should now appear as compatible and can be used for expansion, drive replacement, or assigned as hot spares.

This process can be repeated anytime new unverified drives are introduced. However, to avoid having to manually re-run the script every time, the next section covers how to set up a scheduled task that automates this during every system boot.

---

 

How to Set Up a Scheduled Task to Re-Apply the Fix on Every Reboot

Synology DSM updates or certain system operations can overwrite or reset the internal compatibility database, especially after version upgrades or service restarts. To ensure that unverified drives remain recognized and fully functional even after a reboot, you can configure a scheduled task that automatically re-applies the compatibility script at every startup.

Step-by-Step Instructions:

• Log in to DSM and open Task Scheduler
  • Go to Control Panel > Task Scheduler.
  • Click Create > Triggered Task > User-defined script.
• Configure the general settings
  • Task Name: Name it something descriptive like Drive Compatibility Patch.
  • User: Select root from the dropdown (this is essential for full system access).
  • Event: Select Boot-up so the script runs every time the NAS starts.
  • Leave Enabled checked.

• Set the script action
  • Click on the Task Settings tab.
  • In the User-defined script box, enter the following command:

    mkdir -m775 /opt
    cd /opt || (echo "Failed to CD to /opt"; exit 1)
    curl -O "https://raw.githubusercontent.com/007revad/Synology_HDD_db/refs/heads/main/syno_hdd_db.sh"
    curl -O "https://raw.githubusercontent.com/007revad/Synology_HDD_db/refs/heads/main/syno_hdd_vendor_ids.txt"
    chmod 750 /opt/syno_hdd_db.sh
    /opt/syno_hdd_db.sh -e
    

  • This ensures the script is always downloaded fresh and applied with the -e flag for compatibility with scheduled tasks and email output (if enabled).
• Optional email notifications
  • Still under Task Settings, you can enable email alerts to be notified if the script fails or terminates abnormally.
• Save and test
  • Click OK to save the task.
  • You can manually run the task to confirm it executes correctly.
  • Reboot the NAS to ensure the script is applied at boot and unverified drives remain fully usable.

This scheduled task ensures long-term reliability and reduces the need for manual intervention whenever DSM is restarted, updated, or new drives are introduced.

---

Synology’s decision to restrict drive compatibility in its 2025 and later NAS models has complicated matters for users who prefer flexibility in their storage choices. However, through a combination of Telnet access, SSH scripting, and community-built tools like Dave Russell’s syno_hdd_db.sh, it is entirely possible to restore full drive functionality—even when using completely unverified SATA or NVMe devices. By following the steps outlined in this guide, users can install DSM on unverified drives, create storage pools, use SSDs for caching, and expand or modify their RAID configurations without limitations. Setting up an automated scheduled task further ensures these capabilities persist through reboots and DSM updates. While Synology may eventually broaden official support, this method provides a reliable and reversible way to maintain full control over your hardware today.

---

Should You Buy the Synology DS925+ NAS?

In practical terms, the DS925+ is the stronger out-of-the-box choice, especially for users who value simplicity, improved default performance, and do not anticipate needing higher-than-2.5GbE networking down the line. However, the long-term value proposition becomes murkier when you factor in the DS923+’s PCIe expansion, broader drive compatibility, and the potential price drops that will follow its ageing status in Synology’s lineup. In short, the DS925+ is the better NAS on day one—more powerful, faster, and quieter. But if you’re planning for day 1,000, it’s worth pausing to consider whether the expandability and media flexibility of the DS923+ may be a better fit for your storage and networking needs over the next five to seven years.

Synology DS925+ NAS		Synology DS923+ NAS
Check Amazon in Your Region for the Synology DS925+ NAS	Check B&H for the Synology DS925+ NAS	Check Amazon in Your Region for the Synology DS923+ NAS	Check B&H for the Synology DS923+ NAS

---

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER
[contact-form-7]
Join Inner Circle

This description contains links to Amazon. These links will take you to some of the products mentioned in today's content. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Visit the NASCompares Deal Finder to find the best place to buy this device in your region, based on Service, Support and Reputation - Just Search for your NAS Drive in the Box Below

Need Advice on Data Storage from an Expert?

Finally, for free advice about your setup, just leave a message in the comments below here at NASCompares.com and we will get back to you. Need Help? Where possible (and where appropriate) please provide as much information about your requirements, as then I can arrange the best answer and solution to your needs. Do not worry about your e-mail address being required, it will NOT be used in a mailing list and will NOT be used in any way other than to respond to your enquiry. [contact-form-7] TRY CHAT Terms and Conditions   Alternatively, why not ask me on the ASK NASCompares forum, by clicking the button below. This is a community hub that serves as a place that I can answer your question, chew the fat, share new release information and even get corrections posted. I will always get around to answering ALL queries, but as a one-man operation, I cannot promise speed! So by sharing your query in the ASK NASCompares section below, you can get a better range of solutions and suggestions, alongside my own.

WE LOVE COFFEE

 

Synology Hard Drives and SSD Comparison with Seagate/WD/Toshiba and More – Deal Breaker?

In recent years, Synology has steadily moved toward a more vertically integrated hardware ecosystem, and the arrival of the 2025 generation of NAS systems marks a significant escalation in that approach. With a much stricter verification process for compatible storage media—covering both hard drives and SSDs—Synology now appears to heavily prioritize its own branded storage. This shift has sparked widespread debate across the NAS community, particularly as many long-time users of Seagate IronWolf, WD Red, and Toshiba NAS drives find themselves increasingly locked out of certain key features like RAID expansion, hot spare assignment, and recovery operations unless using “verified” drives. What’s more, while some of Synology’s media are rebranded and firmware-modified versions of familiar drives from Seagate and Toshiba, the pricing and compatibility limitations often leave users puzzled—and frustrated.

Want to Support What We Do? Use the Links Below to Buy your NAS and/or HDD and SSD Media. Clicking these links will result in a small commission for anything you purchase, heading to me and Eddie @NASCompares and allows us to keep doing this! It’s just us two here and between this and ads, it’s the most passive way to keep us sailing! Thanks

Synology NAS and Media on Amazon – HERE Synology Products on B&H – HERE Seagate Ironwolf Media on Amazon – HERE WD Red Media on Amazon – HERE Seagate Products on B&H – HERE WD Products on B&H – HERE

In response to growing user concern, we conducted a comparison of Synology’s drive lineup against the current offerings from Seagate, WD, and Kingston—analyzing each in terms of price per terabyte, real-world performance, durability specifications, and availability. Drawing from direct benchmarking, manufacturer datasheets, and controlled NAS testing environments, this article aims to answer a key question: is Synology’s branded media actually worth the premium? While some users may welcome the simplicity of a one-brand ecosystem, others are understandably wary of higher costs, limited SKU availability, and the potential long-term implications of vendor lock-in. Let’s break down what Synology drives really offer—and where they fall short—compared to the tried and tested alternatives on the market.

Synology Hard Drives and SSDs – What Drives Are There to Buy?

Synology’s storage media catalog is divided across value, prosumer, enterprise SATA, and SAS hard drives, alongside both SATA and NVMe SSDs. While these drives carry the Synology name and firmware, they are not designed or manufactured in-house. Instead, Synology rebrands OEM hardware from established vendors: Toshiba for the enterprise SATA and SAS drives, Seagate for the value-tier NAS HDDs, and Phison-based platforms for SSDs. The internal firmware is customized by Synology to integrate tightly with DSM, and in some cases, to restrict compatibility to only their branded drives within the latest 2025 NAS systems.

The naming scheme makes it easier to distinguish between drive classes:

• HAT for SATA NAS hard drives

• HAS for SAS enterprise drives

• SAT for SATA SSDs

• SNV for NVMe SSDs

This segmentation aims to help users align their hardware with expected durability (e.g. workload in TB/year), power loss protection, and RAID integration. However, it’s worth noting that several of these drives are virtually identical to third-party counterparts—particularly in the HAT3300 and HAT3310 lines, which closely mirror Seagate IronWolf models down to mechanical structure and spec. Despite this, third-party versions of those drives remain incompatible with key RAID features on the latest Synology systems unless they are officially “verified.”

---

Synology NAS HDDs – HAT Series (SATA)

---

Synology SAS HDDs – HAS Series

---

Synology SATA SSDs – SAT Series

---

Synology NVMe SSDs – SNV Series

---

While Synology’s branding suggests ecosystem cohesion, it’s essential to recognize that their drive firmware is not engineered for general-purpose systems. These drives are optimized—and in some cases restricted—for Synology NAS environments. However, performance benchmarks show that Synology drives often perform equivalently or slightly below their third-party counterparts in synthetic and real-world tests. Moreover, price comparisons reveal a 5–15% markup on average in the value tier, and significantly higher deltas—often exceeding 30–40%—in the enterprise-class and SSD segments. Combined with regional supply inconsistencies and limited SKU availability, the value proposition of Synology-branded drives remains hotly debated, especially when identical hardware from Seagate or Toshiba can be purchased for less—if only the 2025 NAS series would support them natively.

Synology Hard Drives and SSDs vs Seagate, WD, etc – Price per TB and Value

When it comes to entry-level NAS hard drives, the price differences between Synology’s HAT3300 and HAT3310 series and their third-party equivalents—such as Seagate IronWolf and WD Red Plus—are generally modest. In most cases, the cost per terabyte (TB) stays within a 0% to 15% margin, with Synology’s versions sitting slightly higher. For casual or home users who just want a drive that “just works” out of the box and benefits from firmware-level integration with DSM, that small premium might feel justifiable.

But the story changes dramatically as we move into prosumer and enterprise territory. Drives like the Synology HAT5300 and HAS5300 series can cost 40%–50% more than Seagate IronWolf Pro, WD Red Pro, or Seagate Exos alternatives—despite sharing the same mechanical internals in many cases. These aren’t just marginal differences; when you’re building a multi-drive RAID array with 12TB or 16TB drives, that pricing gap quickly snowballs into hundreds or even thousands of dollars extra. And this is particularly frustrating when, for example, Synology’s 12TB HAT5300 (built on Toshiba hardware) costs nearly double what a comparable IronWolf Pro sells for, despite similar endurance ratings and warranty terms.

---

Entry-Level NAS HDDs – Synology vs Seagate & WD

---

Prosumer NAS HDDs – Synology vs Seagate & WD

---

Enterprise SAS HDDs – Synology vs Seagate Exos

---

Enterprise SATA SSDs – Synology vs Kingston

---

NVMe SSDs – Synology vs WD Red SN700

In short, while Synology’s drives are built on reputable platforms and do offer advantages like verified DSM integration and predictable firmware behavior, the value proposition becomes questionable—especially in higher capacities and enterprise deployments. For many users, especially SMBs and home power users deploying multi-drive setups, that extra 40–50% markup can be hard to justify. When the mechanical hardware is near-identical and the only major differentiator is firmware control, it’s no wonder many are pushing back against this pricing structure.)

SYNOLOGY DSM Storage Manager Benchmarks (1st and 3rd Party Drive Media)

Zoom in to see the results. IMPORTANT that you keep in mind that these SSDs and HDDs are different capacities and therefore direct comparison and correlation between their performance is not fair – I include these because I think it is important to compare the general gist of using Synology HDD media in a system and then alternatives, but measured with Synology’s in-system tools. Larger capacities mostly tend to yeald better results in any brand of drive (not a ‘do-or-die’ rule, but generally true).

SYNOLOGY HAT3300 HDD	Seagate Ironwolf HDD
SYNOLOGY HAT5300 HDD	Seagate EXOS HDD
SYNOLOGY SAT5200 SSD	Kingston DC600 SATA SSD
SYNOLOGY M.2 NVMe SSD	TeamGroup T-Create Gen3 M.2 SSD

Synology Hard Drives and SSDs vs Seagate, WD, etc – Performance

IMPORTANT – In the process of upscaling the test result images (as there is a lot crammed in, so I have included the slightly blurred ones here) but I and will replace these with upscaled versions as soon as possible.

When it comes to performance, Synology’s hard drives and SSDs generally stay within expected ranges for their class—but with some caveats. Most of their HDDs mirror the performance of the OEM drives they’re based on, particularly in the HAT3300 and HAT3310 lines, which perform nearly identically to WD Red Plus and Seagate IronWolf models. You’re looking at familiar specs here: 5400–7200 RPM spin speeds, ~200–280MB/s sequential transfer rates, and ~180TB/yr workload ratings. That’s no surprise, considering these are essentially Seagate or Toshiba drives with Synology firmware and branding. Where things start to scale up, like in the HAT5300 and HAS5300 series, the specs remain on par with their higher-end third-party equivalents. These drives offer 550TB/year workloads, 7200 RPM motors, and MTBF figures around 2.5 million hours—just like IronWolf Pro, WD Red Pro, or Seagate Exos. But Synology currently tops out at 20TB in both SATA and SAS drives, while the competition is already pushing 22TB, 24TB, and even 26TB models. So, if you’re planning a high-capacity build, Synology might already be limiting your options on sheer scale alone.

---

NAS HDDs – Capacity, Performance, Endurance & Class Comparison

---

Performance parity continues with Synology’s SATA SSDs. The SAT5221 and SAT5210 series are very close in spec to Kingston’s DC600M drives, offering similar read/write speeds, IOPS performance, and endurance levels. The SAT5210 even pushes into ultra-DWPD territory, boasting up to 10,000 TBW and higher daily write thresholds, which is competitive in the enterprise space. If you need high write endurance and steady power loss protection, these drives tick the right boxes.

The gap, however, opens up in the NVMe tier. Synology’s SNV3400 and SNV3500 drives fall short compared to third-party NVMe SSDs like the WD Red SN700. While Synology focuses on endurance, PLP (power loss protection), and integration with DSM caching features, the performance ceiling on these drives is noticeably lower—both in terms of sequential throughput and IOPS. Capacities also top out at 800GB, while others offer 1TB and beyond with faster read/write performance. So if you’re after speed or larger NVMe caching pools, Synology’s current options may feel behind the curve.

---

SATA & NVMe SSDs – Synology vs Kingston

---

In short, Synology’s drives generally deliver solid, reliable performance that matches their third-party foundations—but the benefits of full DSM compatibility come with a trade-off. While the SATA range holds its ground, the NVMe lineup is due for an update if Synology wants to stay competitive against higher-capacity, higher-speed SSDs now widely available elsewhere. If performance is your main concern, particularly for NVMe caching or flash-heavy tasks, third-party options may be a better fit unless full integration is a must-have.

Synology Hard Drives and SSDs Guide – The Good and the Bad

In reviewing Synology’s lineup of hard drives and SSDs, it’s clear that the hardware itself is solid—built on trusted OEM foundations and tuned to work seamlessly within DSM environments. From a compatibility and reliability standpoint, these drives do offer advantages, particularly for users who want an integrated, no-hassle deployment. That said, these benefits come with notable trade-offs. In many cases, Synology’s drives are mechanically identical to models from Seagate, Toshiba, or Phison, yet priced significantly higher—especially in the enterprise and NVMe tiers. While some of that premium may be justified by firmware-level integration, PLP, or simplified support paths, the cost disparity is hard to ignore for experienced users already comfortable with third-party hardware.

Ultimately, the decision to adopt Synology-branded drives will depend on your priorities. If you’re building a system where out-of-the-box compatibility, long-term support, and unified ecosystem control are paramount, Synology’s media may be a safe bet—albeit at a higher packaged price. But if your focus is on maximizing performance per dollar, scaling capacity, or customizing your setup beyond Synology’s verified list, third-party alternatives remain the more flexible and cost-effective choice. Until Synology expands their verified media list and adjusts regional pricing or availability, many users will continue to see these drives not as a value-add, but as an imposed requirement.

Want to Support What We Do? Use the Links Below to Buy your NAS and/or HDD and SSD Media. Clicking these links will result in a small commission for anything you purchase, heading to me and Eddie @NASCompares and allows us to keep doing this! It’s just us two here and between this and ads, it’s the most passive way to keep us sailing! Thanks

Synology NAS and Media on Amazon – HERE Synology Products on B&H – HERE Seagate Ironwolf Media on Amazon – HERE WD Red Media on Amazon – HERE Seagate Products on B&H – HERE WD Products on B&H – HERE

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER
[contact-form-7]
Join Inner Circle

This description contains links to Amazon. These links will take you to some of the products mentioned in today's content. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Visit the NASCompares Deal Finder to find the best place to buy this device in your region, based on Service, Support and Reputation - Just Search for your NAS Drive in the Box Below

Need Advice on Data Storage from an Expert?

Finally, for free advice about your setup, just leave a message in the comments below here at NASCompares.com and we will get back to you. Need Help? Where possible (and where appropriate) please provide as much information about your requirements, as then I can arrange the best answer and solution to your needs. Do not worry about your e-mail address being required, it will NOT be used in a mailing list and will NOT be used in any way other than to respond to your enquiry. [contact-form-7] TRY CHAT Terms and Conditions   Alternatively, why not ask me on the ASK NASCompares forum, by clicking the button below. This is a community hub that serves as a place that I can answer your question, chew the fat, share new release information and even get corrections posted. I will always get around to answering ALL queries, but as a one-man operation, I cannot promise speed! So by sharing your query in the ASK NASCompares section below, you can get a better range of solutions and suggestions, alongside my own.

WE LOVE COFFEE

 

30TB Seagate Ironwolf Pro and EXOS HDD Review – When is Enough, Enough?

The arrival of 30TB capacity hard drives from Seagate — in the form of the IronWolf Pro ST30000NT011 and the Exos M ST30000NM004K — marks another incremental step in high-capacity storage for NAS and enterprise environments. Both models utilize helium-sealed conventional magnetic recording (CMR) technology and pack ten platters at 3TB each into the familiar 3.5-inch form factor. This represents the highest available capacity in a single drive to date, offering an alternative to more complex arrays of smaller disks while preserving compatibility with standard SATA 6Gb/s interfaces. These drives maintain a 7200 RPM spindle speed, 512MB cache, and sustained transfer rates approaching 275MB/s, making them suitable for environments that demand both scale and consistent throughput. The IronWolf Pro is targeted at commercial NAS and multi-user SMB deployments, where ease of integration, features like IronWolf Health Management (IHM), and bundled data recovery services are priorities. The Exos M, by contrast, is designed for data centers and hyperscale cloud storage, where maximum density, superior energy efficiency per terabyte, and sustainability play a more critical role. This review examines not only how these two 30TB drives are constructed and perform in practice, but also explores their compatibility with existing NAS hardware and server infrastructures, as well as the trade-offs involved when moving to such large single-drive capacities.

Seagate 30TB Ironwolf Pro and EXOS Hard Drive – Quick Conclusion

The Seagate IronWolf Pro 30TB and Exos M 30TB represent the cutting edge of mechanical storage, delivering unprecedented density in a standard 3.5-inch, SATA-compatible form factor. Both drives achieve their capacity through a helium-sealed, ten-platter CMR design, offering sustained transfer rates of up to 275 MB/s, 24/7 operability, and an MTBF of 2.5 million hours, making them viable for demanding NAS and enterprise environments. The IronWolf Pro is positioned for SMBs and creative professionals, bundling IronWolf Health Management for drive monitoring and three years of Rescue Data Recovery Services for additional peace of mind, while the Exos M caters to hyperscale and data center deployments by emphasizing power efficiency, sustainability, and seamless integration at scale. These drives are not for casual or budget-conscious users, as their high power consumption, increased heat output, and louder acoustics require properly specified NAS or server hardware to operate reliably. Additionally, their massive single-drive capacity raises practical considerations around redundancy, RAID rebuild times, and backup planning, which can offset some of the benefits of ultra-high density. Nonetheless, for users and organizations that can justify the investment and design their infrastructure to accommodate the specific demands of these drives, both models offer compelling solutions to growing storage needs. The IronWolf Pro excels in environments that value monitoring, support, and ease of deployment, while the Exos M is a better fit where operational efficiency and cost-per-terabyte are paramount, ensuring each serves its intended audience effectively.

 

You can purchase the Seagate Ironwolf 30TB Hard Drive Series via the links below: Seagate 30TB Ironwolf Pro HDD HERE on Amazon Seagate 30TB EXOS HDD HERE on Amazon Seagate 30TB Ironwolf Pro HDD HERE on B&H Seagate 30TB EXOS HDD HERE on B&H * Using these links will result in a small % commission coming to NASCompares and this helps me and Ed here (it really is just us!) to keep making our videos, writing our reviews and providing support in our free support sections for others!

Seagate 30TB Ironwolf Pro and EXOS Hard Drive – Design and Build

So, first up, below is a side-by-side comparison of the key specifications of the Seagate IronWolf Pro 30TB and Seagate Exos M 30TB drives. Both drives use CMR recording, a helium-sealed 10-platter design, and are built around similar mechanical and electrical platforms, but each is targeted at different use cases: SMB/creative NAS environments versus hyperscale cloud and enterprise data centers. This table highlights their similarities and subtle differences.

The IronWolf Pro places significant emphasis on durability and reliability within multi-bay NAS systems, making it well-suited to SMB and creative workflows. It achieves a mean time between failures (MTBF) of 2.5 million hours and carries a 5-year limited warranty, consistent with Seagate’s premium NAS offerings. The workload rate limit (WRL) of 550TB per year matches that of previous IronWolf Pro models but at higher capacity, allowing for heavier data activity in RAID configurations without voiding warranty terms.

To mitigate vibration issues common in dense multi-drive arrays, the IronWolf Pro integrates rotational vibration (RV) sensors that detect and compensate for external vibrations, stabilizing head positioning to maintain consistent throughput. Acoustically, the drive has been measured at approximately 28 dBA at idle and 32 dBA under seek activity, levels low enough to remain acceptable in small server rooms or under-desk NAS units, though still noticeable in very quiet environments.

By contrast, the Exos M 30TB, though physically and mechanically similar, is tuned for the needs of enterprise-scale and hyperscale cloud deployments. Its construction prioritizes energy efficiency per terabyte and long-term durability at scale, with features like PowerChoice for adaptive idle modes and PowerBalance for optimized performance-to-watt ratios. These firmware-driven features help reduce total operational costs when thousands of drives are deployed. The Exos M also includes RSA 3072 firmware verification for enhanced data security and is assembled with higher use of recycled materials and renewable energy inputs than earlier generations. These factors align it with the sustainability initiatives many data center operators are now targeting, while maintaining interoperability by preserving the same form factor, interface, and airflow characteristics as previous generations.

Both drives feature hardware-level secure data management, supporting Seagate’s Instant Secure Erase (ISE) to allow administrators to cryptographically erase all user data before redeploying or decommissioning a drive. This functionality is especially relevant for enterprise customers concerned with compliance and data security in multi-tenant environments. For SMB customers, the IronWolf Pro adds another layer of protection with Seagate’s Rescue Data Recovery Services bundled for three years, providing access to Seagate’s in-house data recovery team. This service has an advertised 95% success rate and is included at no additional cost, addressing accidental deletions, corruption, and even some mechanical failures — something that the Exos M does not include by default, as enterprises generally rely on their own backup and recovery procedures.

Finally, it is important to note the environmental operating specifications and resilience engineered into these drives. Both models operate safely in ambient temperatures between 10°C and 60°C and can tolerate non-operating storage temperatures down to –40°C and up to 70°C. They are rated to withstand 30Gs of shock during operation and up to 200Gs when non-operational, which is critical during shipping and installation in dense arrays. Vibration tolerances are also robust, with rotational vibration resistance specified up to 12.5 rad/s² between 10Hz and 1500Hz. Both require both +12V and +5V power rails and draw a typical 6.8–6.9W at idle, which increases during read/write activity as noted in Seagate’s specifications. Taken together, these figures indicate that while the drives are robust enough for demanding environments, users should still ensure their NAS or server chassis provides sufficient cooling, airflow, and power delivery to stay within these tolerances.

Comparing the 30TB IronWolf Pro to the 24TB IronWolf Pro and 4TB IronWolf (Non‑Pro) for Perspective

The 30TB IronWolf Pro represents Seagate’s largest capacity in the NAS‑optimized lineup, continuing the incremental increase in platter count, areal density, and helium‑sealed design. The 4TB non‑Pro IronWolf uses a more modest five‑platter, air‑filled design spinning at 5400 RPM, while the 24TB IronWolf Pro was the previous capacity peak, utilizing nine helium‑sealed platters and a 7200 RPM spindle. Despite sharing the same CMR recording and SATA interface, there is a clear progression in performance, power requirements, noise, and workload tolerances across these models. This comparison highlights how structural changes and internal technologies evolve with capacity—and where trade‑offs emerge at the top end of the spectrum.

Seagate 30TB Ironwolf Pro and EXOS Hard Drive – Performance, Noise and NAS Compatibility (WiP)

Performance testing of the Seagate IronWolf Pro 30TB and Exos M 30TB confirms that both drives deliver sustained sequential transfer rates close to their advertised 275 MB/s. In NAS systems tested—including QNAP, Synology, and Asustor platforms—both drives initialized without compatibility errors and achieved typical sequential read speeds of 268–270 MB/s and write speeds of 252–262 MB/s, depending on the platform and RAID configuration. These results align with expectations for a modern 7200 RPM CMR drive with a 512 MB cache and demonstrate that even at 30TB, throughput remains consistent with prior Pro‑series drives. Random IOPS, while limited compared to SSDs, remain within acceptable ranges for NAS workloads, with the Exos M specified at up to 170 IOPS read and 350 IOPS write at 4K QD16. Latency is nominal at approximately 4.16 ms, which is typical for this class of mechanical drive. Importantly, no firmware or block‑size compatibility issues were noted, and both drives default to 512e sector formatting, ensuring out‑of‑the‑box operability with most modern operating systems and file systems.

Acoustic performance, however, is noticeably impacted by the increase in platter count and capacity. During idle, the IronWolf Pro registers approximately 28 dBA in a quiet environment, with seek noise rising to around 32 dBA. These figures are slightly higher than those of the 24TB Pro and significantly more pronounced than the older 4TB IronWolf non‑Pro, which produces closer to 20–24 dBA. Subjectively, this noise was clearly audible in a quiet office when installed in a plastic‑chassis NAS and became more noticeable under heavy write operations. In larger arrays, particularly in 8‑bay or 12‑bay enclosures fully populated with these drives, cumulative vibration and resonance may amplify the perceived noise level. By comparison, the Exos M does not publish specific acoustic figures, reflecting its assumption of deployment in already noisy data center environments where ambient noise levels mask individual drive activity.

On the topic of environmental and electrical specifications, both drives are built to operate reliably in demanding conditions. The IronWolf Pro and Exos M are rated for continuous operation at ambient temperatures from 10 °C to 60 °C and can withstand storage temperatures from −40 °C to 70 °C when powered off. Shock ratings remain robust at 30 G operating and 200 G non‑operating, ensuring safe transport and handling before installation. Rotational vibration tolerance of up to 12.5 rad/s² helps maintain head‑positioning accuracy even in vibration‑prone multi‑drive arrays. Power draw, as specified by Seagate, averages around 6.8–6.9 W when idle and rises to between 8.3–9.5 W during typical operating workloads, depending on the model. Although these figures are in line with expectations for drives of this capacity, they are higher than those of lower‑capacity models, and users should ensure their NAS or server power delivery and airflow are sufficient.

In terms of platform compatibility, early testing shows that both drives are recognized and functional in all major NAS operating systems tested, including Synology DSM, QNAP QTS, TrueNAS SCALE, and Unraid. Both drives initialized cleanly, allowed full‑capacity volume creation, and performed as expected in single‑disk, RAID‑1, and RAID‑5 configurations. Some NAS brands, such as Synology’s newer units, do issue warnings when non‑Synology‑branded drives are installed, but no functional limitations were encountered. The Exos M, while designed primarily for enterprise and cloud storage arrays, showed no incompatibilities when deployed in smaller NAS appliances. As always, users are advised to consult their NAS vendor’s compatibility list to ensure formal support for these models.

Important point here – As this drive is something of a ‘bigger boy’ – the INITIAL power draw of the drive is quite high, so we are starting to see some examples of particularly high initial power draw drives having issues with NAS backboard/SATA PCB boards that do not have the consistent power delivery needed for larger drive arrays to be stable for a large number of big drives like this one. It’s a small % chance of being an issue, but it does mean that although support and compatibility of the Seagate Ironwolf Pro and EXOS 30TB Hard Drive might be fine on a lot of devices, more power efficient systems or lose built to a lower production cost that reduce a lot of the power deliver (PD) might have long term running and stability issues with drives of this scale down the road.

Seagate 30TB Ironwolf Pro and EXOS Hard Drive – Conclusion and Verdict

The Seagate IronWolf Pro 30TB and Exos M 30TB drives both exemplify the steady evolution of high‑capacity mechanical storage, bringing unprecedented density to the familiar 3.5‑inch form factor without sacrificing the reliability and compatibility that enterprise and NAS users expect. At 30TB each, they are currently the largest CMR SATA hard drives available, delivering predictable sustained transfer rates close to 275 MB/s and designed to operate 24/7 with an MTBF of 2.5 million hours. Both feature helium‑sealed, 10‑platter designs and include hardware‑level protections such as Instant Secure Erase and rotational vibration mitigation, which are critical in multi‑bay arrays. Where they differ is in market focus: the IronWolf Pro is clearly tailored for SMBs, creative professionals, and enterprise NAS environments that benefit from health monitoring via IronWolf Health Management and the inclusion of three years of Rescue Data Recovery Service, making it easier for smaller teams to recover from accidental loss. The Exos M, by contrast, is optimized for hyperscale data centers, where sustainability, operational cost per terabyte, and compatibility with existing rack infrastructure take precedence, and where administrators already have recovery processes in place.

That said, deploying drives of this capacity is not without its operational and economic considerations. At 30TB per drive, both models demand careful attention to power and cooling: idle and active power consumption are notably higher than lower‑capacity drives, and the additional heat and acoustic output can challenge under‑spec’d NAS enclosures. In smaller or plastic‑chassis NAS units, the noise profile of several of these drives spinning simultaneously can become disruptive in quiet offices or residential settings. Additionally, the sheer size of each drive raises planning concerns around data redundancy and recovery times—should a 30TB drive fail, rebuilding a RAID array or restoring from backup can take significantly longer than with smaller disks. For some users, a lower‑capacity, higher‑spindle‑count configuration may still provide better performance in parallelized workloads and potentially faster rebuild times, while keeping per‑drive costs more manageable.

Ultimately, both the IronWolf Pro 30TB and Exos M 30TB succeed at what they set out to do: deliver maximum capacity in a familiar, standards‑compliant format for users and organizations that can benefit from ultra‑dense storage. For NAS and SMB environments prioritizing ease of use, monitoring, and support, the IronWolf Pro remains the obvious choice. For data centers and hyperscale operations where scale, efficiency, and sustainability dominate requirements, the Exos M makes more sense. Either way, these drives are best viewed as specialist tools, suited to those prepared to manage the trade‑offs inherent in such high‑capacity storage. Provided that the environment, workload, and backup strategy are properly aligned, they offer a compelling, if premium, solution for meeting the growing demands of modern data storage.

You can purchase the Seagate Ironwolf 30TB Hard Drive Series via the links below: Seagate 30TB Ironwolf Pro HDD HERE on Amazon Seagate 30TB EXOS HDD HERE on Amazon Seagate 30TB Ironwolf Pro HDD HERE on B&H Seagate 30TB EXOS HDD HERE on B&H * Using these links will result in a small % commission coming to NASCompares and this helps me and Ed here (it really is just us!) to keep making our videos, writing our reviews and providing support in our free support sections for others!

PROs of the Seagate 30TB Ironwolf Pro and EXOs

PROs of the Seagate 30TB Ironwolf Pro and EXOs

Unprecedented Capacity — Both drives offer 30TB in a single 3.5-inch drive, reducing the number of disks needed for large arrays and saving space – but doing so in a CMR design (and not SMR) is just incredible Helium-Sealed Design — Uses a proven 10-platter, helium-filled architecture for improved reliability, reduced turbulence, and better areal density. Consistent Performance — Sustained transfer rates up to 275 MB/s and predictable latency ensure stable throughput for NAS and enterprise workloads. Enterprise-Grade Reliability — MTBF of 2.5 million hours, 550 TB/year workload rating, and 24/7 operation make them suited for demanding environments. Feature Sets Tailored to Audience — IronWolf Pro includes IronWolf Health Management and 3-year Rescue Recovery; Exos M adds power optimization and sustainability focus. Broad Compatibility — Fully SATA 6Gb/s compliant and functional across major NAS brands, RAID configurations, and operating systems without special drivers. Secure Data Management — Both support Instant Secure Erase (ISE) with Exos M adding RSA firmware verification for data security compliance.

Higher Power and Heat — Increased power consumption and thermal output require well-cooled, properly provisioned enclosures and PSUs. Audible Noise Levels — Louder idle and seek noise, especially when used in multi-drive NAS arrays, can be disruptive in quiet environments. Expensive Per Unit — High initial cost compared to smaller capacity drives, with diminishing returns in some scenarios if not fully utilized or backed up properly.

Find regulary updated NAS offers here
Of course I would prefer you choose AMAZON UK AMAZON USA to buy your perfect solution, however, if you would rather buy locally, please use the links used above to take you to your local Amazon store and help support this free advice service with ad revenue. More ways of supporting the blog are described HERE  
Home: https://www.backblaze.com/cloud-backup.html#af9rgr Business: https://www.backblaze.com/business-backup.html#af9rgr Comparison with other service providers: https://www.backblaze.com/best-online-backup-service.html#af9rgr   SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER
[contact-form-7]
Join Inner Circle

This description contains links to Amazon. These links will take you to some of the products mentioned in today's content. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Visit the NASCompares Deal Finder to find the best place to buy this device in your region, based on Service, Support and Reputation - Just Search for your NAS Drive in the Box Below

Need Advice on Data Storage from an Expert?

Finally, for free advice about your setup, just leave a message in the comments below here at NASCompares.com and we will get back to you. Need Help? Where possible (and where appropriate) please provide as much information about your requirements, as then I can arrange the best answer and solution to your needs. Do not worry about your e-mail address being required, it will NOT be used in a mailing list and will NOT be used in any way other than to respond to your enquiry. [contact-form-7] TRY CHAT Terms and Conditions   Alternatively, why not ask me on the ASK NASCompares forum, by clicking the button below. This is a community hub that serves as a place that I can answer your question, chew the fat, share new release information and even get corrections posted. I will always get around to answering ALL queries, but as a one-man operation, I cannot promise speed! So by sharing your query in the ASK NASCompares section below, you can get a better range of solutions and suggestions, alongside my own.

WE LOVE COFFEE

 

Synology Explain WHY They Changed Drive Support and Verification in 2025 NAS

During a recent visit to Taipei for Computex 2025, I took the opportunity to visit Synology’s headquarters and speak directly with company representatives about one of the most discussed and divisive topics in the NAS community today — the company’s increasingly strict stance on hard drive compatibility. With the rollout of Synology’s latest generation of hardware, users have been met with significant limitations on the use of third-party drives, prompting concern over reduced flexibility, potential e-waste, and the future direction of Synology’s hardware ecosystem. This article provides a can overview of that visit, beginning with the HQ tour, but mainly it is about putting several big questions users have about the brand’s change in support of Seagate, WD, etc on their 2025 devices.

Four core questions — based on direct community feedback — were put forward, addressing the motivation, risks, and future implications of Synology’s current drive support policy. Each answer is presented exactly as delivered. Note, this article is not sponsored by Synology and they have no control over the editorial stance and output! For users, partners, and industry observers alike, understanding these policy shifts is essential for making informed decisions about Synology systems moving forward.

Touring the Synology Headquarters

The Synology headquarters tour took place during a coordinated visit arranged alongside the Computex 2025 trade event. Approximately 30 to 40 individuals were in attendance, a mix that included official Synology partners, resellers, independent media, and technology commentators. The tour began with a structured company overview presentation outlining Synology’s operational history, business units, and market positioning.

While much of this information was familiar to long-term observers, it served to reinforce the company providing integrated storage and data management solutions. The presentation also included a brief overview of Synology’s global distribution and the evolving structure of its enterprise product lines.

Attendees were then guided through various areas of the facility, which covered several floors within a shared building. Synology does not occupy the entire structure, but the portions shown during the tour were substantial, comprising office sections, collaborative workspaces, logistics coordination areas, and support-related operations. Notably, many desks were temporarily unoccupied due to staff presence at Computex’s Nangang Exhibition Center.

Nonetheless, the offices remained populated with active terminals and systems undergoing live testing.

A significant portion of the tour focused on the environmental and durability testing facilities, including designated zones for acoustic profiling, thermal analysis, and dust resilience. The diversity of units being tested suggested coverage across multiple device classes, including both rackmount and desktop models.

The most extensive portion of the tour was the dedicated test and burn-in area. This floor was almost entirely devoted to long-term performance and diagnostic evaluations. Numerous Synology NAS units — some dating back to the early 2010s — were in continuous operation, either running synthetic workloads or undergoing compatibility assessments with the current DSM operating system.

The presence of so many legacy devices in active testing underscored the company’s emphasis on software longevity and cross-generational hardware support. However, it also provided a contrast to Synology’s new strict verification policies, especially given the mixed hardware environments visible during testing. The tour was led by ZP Kao, Sales Director at Synology, and Chad Chiang, Regional Manager for the UK and Germany, who offered clarification and responded to several direct inquiries during the walkthrough.

Why Has Synology Changed Its HDD Support Policy? Questions and Answers

Questions I put to Synology about their change in policy regarding verifying and supporting drive media being used on their 2025 and later series of NAS devices. I based these on the comments and suggestions from videos on the YouTube channel and comments on previous articles. I am under no illusions that these changes by Synology in their drive support policies have financial justifications (ranging from Support efficiency and it’s financial overhead, to the simple profitability of prioritizing their own labelled firmware optimized storage media choices over those of other brands), but I wanted to know if these were the only reasons for this? What other reasons could Synology provide to support this large and unpopular move. Thank you once again to Chad Chiang for taking the time to answer these questions.

Note – for a better understanding of the current DSM Support of Unverified media, as well as test scenarios detailing each setup and how DSM handles it, you can read it HERE in my Test Article.

How has the verification process changed for which drives you can use on Synology systems moving forward? And are there drive options from WD and Seagate currently undergoing support verification?

Answer – At Synology, we constantly reflect on a core question: Why do people choose a NAS? We believe the answer lies in the need for secure, reliable, and hassle-free data storage. This belief has guided our mission for over a decade. When analyzing our support history, the data clearly shows that systems using Synology-branded drives experience 40% fewer issues compared to those with third-party HDDs. This insight underscores the importance of using thoroughly tested drives. As for which third-party vendors are currently undergoing drive verification, we’re unable to disclose details. For the most accurate and up-to-date information, we recommend reaching out directly to the respective manufacturers.

The response positions Synology’s verification changes as a reliability-focused initiative and smooth platform running as the chief reasoning for them, referencing internal data that suggests a 40% reduction in support issues when Synology-branded drives are used. However, as mentioned previously, the statement does not provide supporting metrics such as sample size, timeframes, or specific failure modes, making it difficult to assess the scope or significance of this claim. I do not doubt that it is true, but without the X/Y and details of how this result was achieved, we are only getting half the story here.  The policy shift is framed as a precautionary measure aimed at minimizing user disruption, but the absence of transparency regarding ongoing verifications with WD or Seagate limits clarity for users seeking alternatives – which is why users are seeing this more as a means for the brand to increase profitability in the 2025 series as a bundled utility purchase – not as a means of system stability.

Ultimately, discussing the technical standards or benchmarks involved in the verification process in paramount here. It largely confirms that responsibility for future third-party compatibility lies with the drive manufacturers themselves, effectively shifting the onus of transparency to them. While it is understandable that Synology might want to mitigate support complexity, the lack of specificity about how the verification criteria have evolved or what steps vendors must follow leaves key questions unanswered for both users and third-party storage providers. I reached out to representatives from Seagate and WD to see if they could elaborate further on this new media side verification process with their respective NAS/Server class media – neither was able to provide further details at this time.

UPDATED 07-05-25 = Added Unverified HDD and SSD (Migrated) Storage Pool RAID Repair, RAID POOL Expansion and Hot Spare Tests. Right now, the following is what works and what does not (between pre-2025 Series and the 2025 Series that is releasing now):

Feature / Function	Pre-2025 Synology NAS<br>(e.g., DS1821+, DS920+, DS923+)	2025 Synology NAS<br>(e.g., DS1825+, DS925+, DS1525+)
DSM Installation – Verified Drives	Full support	Full support
DSM Installation – Non-Verified Drives	Allowed (with warnings)	Blocked completely
Drive Migration (Non-Verified Drives)	Fully functional, minor alerts	Works, but shows persistent warnings
Storage Pool Creation – Verified Drives	Fully supported	Fully supported
Storage Pool Creation – Non-Verified Drives	Allowed (with warnings)	Blocked
Storage Pool Expansion – Verified Drives	Fully supported	Fully supported
Storage Pool Expansion – Non-Verified Drives	Allowed (mixed arrays supported)	Blocked – drives flagged as incompatible
Hot Spare Assignment – Verified Drives	Fully supported	Fully supported
Hot Spare Assignment – Non-Verified Drives	Allowed	Blocked
RAID Recovery – Verified Drives	Supported	Supported
RAID Recovery – Non-Verified Drives	Supported	Blocked – system will not rebuild with unverified media
M.2 NVMe Cache – Synology SSDs	Supported	Supported
M.2 NVMe Cache – 3rd Party SSDs	Supported	Blocked
M.2 NVMe Storage Pools – Synology SSDs	Not supported	Supported
M.2 NVMe Storage Pools – 3rd Party SSDs	Not supported	Blocked
SMART Monitoring – Verified Drives	Full support	Full support
SMART Monitoring – Non-Verified Drives	Full support	Limited or blocked (TBC)
Storage Manager Alerts – Non-Verified Drives	Warnings, dismissible	Persistent, cannot be cleared
Overall Compatibility Flexibility	High – mix-and-match drives allowed	Low – walled-garden enforcement

---

Users are able to migrate existing storage arrays that feature Unverified/unsupported drive media in previous Synology systems into 2025 Plus series devices and still use DSM services – however once they do so, they are unable to use the same model ID of drives to perform RAID recovery, RAID expansion or introduced a hot spare, unless that drive is on the verified drive list. Why is this?

Answer- Advanced operations such as RAID recovery, expansion, or hot spare assignment are technically intensive and carry a higher risk of data loss if inconsistencies arise. Drives that haven’t been validated through Synology’s verification process may behave unpredictably under stress, impacting array stability or performance. For this reason, support for these functions is limited to verified drives—a precaution designed to safeguard user data and maintain long-term system reliability.

So, this answer outlines Synology’s rationale for restricting critical RAID operations on unverified drives and It emphasizes the increased risk associated with advanced storage operations, particularly when performed on drives that may not have been tested under stress or fault conditions. The justification focuses on data integrity and system reliability, suggesting that verified drives have undergone stress testing scenarios that others have not. However, the lack of granularity in what defines “unpredictable behavior” makes it difficult to independently evaluate the severity or frequency of these issues. Much like the statistics point earlier, this seems a remarkable stretch in terms of reaction to what many users would consider a very, very low % risk factor. Equally, though there is an argument that some drive media is less suitable for NAS usage (eg the WD Red SMR drives, desktop single drive use media like Seagate Barracuda and high power draw HDDs/SSDs in some cases), these make up a very small % of drive media in the market and using this as a reasoning to effectively bar the continued support of drive media that has been supported/used in Synology server use over the last 2 decades to prevent RAID recovery and Expansion in the latest gen for those carrying them over seems insane overkill.

The policy effectively limits upgradability and flexibility in mixed-drive environments. While it is technically reasonable to restrict risky operations on unvalidated components, the ability to migrate but not expand or rebuild a RAID introduces a half-measure — allowing users to enter unsupported configurations while restricting them mid-cycle. The result is a system state that may appear functional at first but ultimately lacks key functionality unless users conform to the verified list. For long-term users upgrading from older systems, this shift can lead to unexpected limitations without adequate warning, particularly in small or home office deployments. The messaging has been poor and though I made a video about these limitations (embedded above), there is practically no other clear and transparent information about this online (with incongruous detailson the Synology Knowledge base that could stand to be a lot clearer and louder).

HOT TAKE, and hear me out – If Synology do not allow support of RAID repair/Expansion on drives that have been migrated over from older NAS systems where the drives WERE originally supported (unless they use 2025 verified drives) because of reasons of stability, I have a somewhat extreme suggestion. As unpopular as it might have been, Synology should have just BARRED the support of migration from older generation Synology NAS devices with unverified drives entirely. I personally think they should have allowed for RAID repair/Expansion of unverified drives, but if they are going to pursue this for reasons of system stability, they should have committed to this fully and not allowed this grey area with migration. As it just looks bad for the brand, as means of ensuring people can upgrade/remain in the ecosystem, but then have limited scalability when those older drives require replacement/growth.

---

Were pre-populated Synology NAS devices considered, given the strict verified support stance that this new Synology hardware generation contains?

Answer – Regarding pre-populated NAS solutions, there hasn’t been significant internal discussion or a formal strategy around this model. As such, I don’t have a concrete answer at this time. The focus remains on ensuring that any storage media used—whether user-installed or bundled—is fully verified to meet Synology’s reliability standards.

Not much to unpack here. It makes sense. I imagine they DID discuss this as an option (as they are already engaging with this with systems like the Beestation), but at least for now, it seems off the table. As unpopular as this might have been, in some ways it could have solved a lot of this friction for some users. Provide the 2025 PLUS series as an empty/enclosure-only solution with similar compatibility as the 2024 and earlier generation – but then also supply several pre-populated options that feature Synology drive media as standard. However, that would be a different discussion entirely (eg logistics, SKUs, viability, ROI by offering this alongside flexible options).

---

Can you provide example(s) of critical system issues that using unverified drives caused, that were the tipping point for this new strict HDD support policy?

Examples of what stepped up our verification process moving forward:

Performance Issues: Unverified drives may function under light workloads but can suffer serious performance drops (e.g., IOPS decline) under multi-user access or when running demanding services like virtualization, backup, or databases. This can lead to poor user experience or service disruptions (e.g., iSCSI timeouts).

Stability Risks: Without thorough testing, unverified drives are more prone to failures under stress conditions such as unexpected power loss or long-duration file transfers—leading to timeouts, reboot failures, or data integrity issues in high-load or long-term operations.

Compatibility Problems: Drives not validated for compatibility may show unstable behavior with certain NAS controllers, resulting in drive drops, RAID instability, or data access interruptions over time.

Advanced Feature Failures: Unverified drives may fail during operations like SMART testing or Secure Erase, especially after unexpected power outages. Some drives may not respond properly under frequent access or specific command sets, affecting system stability.

Drive Failures Under High Load or Density: Some drives may become unresponsive under high data density or I/O intensity, with issues persisting even after a reset.

The examples provided by Synology highlight a variety of operational issues associated with unverified drives, most of which relate to performance degradation, system instability, or failure of advanced features under stress. These scenarios focus on workloads involving sustained I/O, power fluctuations, and controller-level interactions. In isolation, many of the issues described are plausible for lower-tier or unsuitable drive models, particularly in demanding or enterprise-like environments. That said, that are very low margins (eg 0.01% or lower) when you look at the traditional deployment of many Synology NAS solution in the Plus series. Again though, the scale and frequency of these issues remain unclear. There is no indication of how widespread such failures are across Synology’s user base, nor whether they represent rare edge cases or common occurrences. The examples also apply more logically to enterprise or high-density configurations, whereas the same strict policies now affect all tiers — including two-bay and four-bay systems used by home and prosumer users. Without concrete statistics or clearer thresholds, it is difficult to assess whether these issues justify the breadth of the policy. The policy appears to target potential worst-case scenarios, but may have broader consequences for user flexibility than the risk profile necessarily warrants.

Additional Information and Details from the MyBroadband Article

Further context on Synology’s new drive compatibility policy was provided in an interview between MyBroadband journalist Daniel Puchert (click to read) and Michael Chang, Synology’s Regional Sales Manager. The discussion reinforced many of the points raised during the HQ visit, while also offering additional information into the motivations behind Synology’s stricter approach to drive support in their latest generation of NAS systems. Chang explained that Synology’s primary objective was to ensure product reliability and reduce system-level faults that were increasingly traced back to third-party hard drives. According to Chang, complaints received by Synology often involved third-party drive issues, yet Synology would still be held accountable by users due to their role as the NAS provider. This prompted the company to centralize responsibility and tighten control over supported hardware configurations. While Synology-branded drives are currently the only models certified, Chang noted that other vendors are being invited to participate in the compatibility validation program — provided they meet the same testing standards.

(In the case of the NAS drives) “..because Synology’s product would typically facilitate the usage of third-party hard drives, it would also be the scapegoat for any faults with the entire system.”

“..complaints received by Synology regarding issues relating to its NAS devices were most often caused by faulty hard drives.

“severe storage anomalies have decreased by up to 88%” for hard drive models that have adopted its hard drive compatibility policy, compared to older models.”

“We still welcome third parties to join Synology’s ecosystem and have invited vendors to join our validation program,”

Michael Chang, Synology Regional Sales Manager – full article HERE

The article also mentioned that Synology-certified drives undergo over 7,000 hours of testing, and systems using those drives reportedly experience 40% fewer failures than those using uncertified media. Additionally, Synology claims that severe storage anomalies have dropped by up to 88% in systems following its compatibility policy. Although Chang confirmed that third-party compatibility may expand in the future, it will only do so under strict adherence to Synology’s internal benchmarks. These statements align with Synology’s position during the HQ tour, further emphasizing a shift toward a closed, highly controlled ecosystem that prioritizes consistent performance over hardware flexibility.

Synology and HDD Support and Verification – Conclusion and the Long Term

My biggest issue with all this is that, almost certainly, we are going to see Seagate, WD, Toshiba and more slow (slooooooooowly) appear on the compatibility lists for a number of the 2025 generation of devices over the coming months. So, what was all this for? The PR damage and likely early sales damage of the Synolgoy 2025 Series because of this change of support I would estimate is going to be pretty substantial – and all the reports and reactions to this online are not going to go away as soon as a Seagate Ironwolf or WD Red drive appears on the support lists. Also, Synology work on these devices for a very, very long time before launch – why is all this happening now – and not before launch. The cynic in me wants to just assume it was pure profitability and that Synology want to maximize profits, and if when this does begin to U-Trun ,that the brand can say that it was the plan all along. But whether that is true or not, the damage to the brand in the eyes of a substantial % of their long term fans is notable, and with many more players in the market (UniFi, QNAP, UGREEN and more) launching new products in Q3 and Q4 – is this all going to be a gamble by the brand that ends up costing them more than just leaving the support status quo where it was? Only time will tell.

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER
[contact-form-7]
Join Inner Circle

This description contains links to Amazon. These links will take you to some of the products mentioned in today's content. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Visit the NASCompares Deal Finder to find the best place to buy this device in your region, based on Service, Support and Reputation - Just Search for your NAS Drive in the Box Below

Need Advice on Data Storage from an Expert?

Finally, for free advice about your setup, just leave a message in the comments below here at NASCompares.com and we will get back to you. Need Help? Where possible (and where appropriate) please provide as much information about your requirements, as then I can arrange the best answer and solution to your needs. Do not worry about your e-mail address being required, it will NOT be used in a mailing list and will NOT be used in any way other than to respond to your enquiry. [contact-form-7] TRY CHAT Terms and Conditions   Alternatively, why not ask me on the ASK NASCompares forum, by clicking the button below. This is a community hub that serves as a place that I can answer your question, chew the fat, share new release information and even get corrections posted. I will always get around to answering ALL queries, but as a one-man operation, I cannot promise speed! So by sharing your query in the ASK NASCompares section below, you can get a better range of solutions and suggestions, alongside my own.

WE LOVE COFFEE